ReaMote + REAPER

[EvilDragon]

Obviously it cannot be open sourced because there are parts of it that are deeply tied to Reaper's guts.

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Obviously it cannot be open sourced because there are parts of it that are deeply tied to Reaper's guts.

No chance to move it in a Reaper extension ? Would be great if it would be possible.

-Michael

[albatteur]

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Obviously it cannot be open sourced because there are parts of it that are deeply tied to Reaper's guts.

Yes I know but it was a dream.

[Niowiad]

I use it quite a lot whenever I am tracking and the keyboard is out of reach.

[akademie]

Originally Posted by Niowiad

I use it quite a lot whenever I am tracking and the keyboard is out of reach.

Hello Niowiad,
discussion here is about ReaMote, not remote control via OSC, web or MIDI. These are different beasts than ReaMote(TM) :-)

Note: ReaMote is for easy and clever offloading of heavy CPU plugins to another networked computers running ReaMote application (part of Reaper installation).

[alanofoz]

While I understand and empathise with those who would miss it, if it's holding back development in other areas it's gotta go.


(Obviously spoken by one who doesn't use it )

[mustgroove]

I would use it all the time if its implementation was slightly different.

The use case I'm looking for is running old unsupported Windows plugins, which have no Mac version at all, inside Reaper Mac projects by running them on a Windows Reamote slave.

The way Reamote operates where you have to have a plugin installed on the slave AND the host (so that you can then choose in the FX window whether that plugin should process on the host or the slave) prevents this option entirely, because the plugins I'd wanna use with Reamote have no Mac version whatsoever.

This one aspect of Reamote's current implementation is the reason why I don't use it, but if it underwent further development and this became possible, I would literally use it every day.

I think ReaMote has some untapped potential in this area - computers are powerful enough now that offloading plugins to slave computers isn't super appealing from a performance point of view, but as a way to facilitate running plugins that only exist on other OSes, I think it could be amazing.

[mustgroove]

Originally Posted by Robert Randolph

Actually, I'm totally wrong.

It was 10 years ago here: https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...07&postcount=3

Oh wow, I never knew this was considered at one point... it's a shame it never got there, but I would 100% use the crap out of it as a way to run PC-only plugins on Mac

[mschnell]

Not needing the remote plugin installed on the local site has a lot more advantages over the MAC/PC issues.

-Michael

[Robert Johnson III]

Would like to see the resources put into other development areas. Never had any need to use it, so a rather biased comment…. But I foresee its usefulness dwindle with every hardware upgrade cycle.

[Robert Randolph]

Originally Posted by Robert Johnson III

Would like to see the resources put into other development areas. Never had any need to use it, so a rather biased comment…. But I foresee its usefulness dwindle with every hardware upgrade cycle.

Hardware has been getting better for the last ~25 years I've been using DAWs, and somehow my plugin counts never go up.

I don't forsee ReaMote becoming less useful as time goes on.

[Niowiad]

Originally Posted by akademie

Hello Niowiad,
discussion here is about ReaMote, not remote control via OSC, web or MIDI. These are different beasts than ReaMote(TM) :-)

Note: ReaMote is for easy and clever offloading of heavy CPU plugins to another networked computers running ReaMote application (part of Reaper installation).

Ouch... way off base.

Thank you very much for clarifying... didn't even know that was a possibility but it sounds very interesting actually. Thanks.

[Reaktor:[Dave]]

Being able to run plugins installed on a single Reamote machine would help in a lot of scenarios. Think of elicenser/dongled plugins, the upcoming Linux version of Reaper or abandonned plugins. This would make Reamote useful to a different kind of users than big-session-composers.

I wouldn't say that the usefulness of Reamote will dwindle with every hardware upgrade cycle. People using network setups have something around and beyond 1000 track count (VSTi+FX on each track). At the current pace, you cannot deal with that in the foreseeable future using a single machine.

[mustgroove]

Originally Posted by Reaktor:[Dave]

Being able to run plugins installed on a single Reamote machine would help in a lot of scenarios. Think of elicenser/dongled plugins, the upcoming Linux version of Reaper or abandonned plugins. This would make Reamote useful to a different kind of users than big-session-composers.

Yeah I totally agree with this. ReaMote definitely has a lot of potential as a useful tool in these situations, no other DAW or wrapper has gone after this type of functionality so it would be another area where Reaper is a unique solution.

[jrengmusic]

I like the idea. Have tried to use it on a several ocassion, but never in production. Because i don’t need to offload CPU processing over network, ever.

If ReaMote would be replaced by more productive features which benefit all user or at least more than user whom couldn’t work in REAPER without it, i am still live and happy using REAPER.

[SonicAxiom]

Using a Dante audio-over-IP network (also Dante Via), one can achieve a similar workflow as with ReaMote. Multiple aux fx sends can be easily routed to other computers via the network audio connection and processed signals can be routed back to the main computer (latency-compensated). However, there's no automatic fall-back to local processing like with ReaMote in case the networked computer(s) is(are) offline.

One considerable advantage of the Dante audio network solution (in addition to numerous other advantages of Dante) is that the plugins do not have to be installed/licenced on multiple machines. You can literally use any spare computer (any operating system) that is capable of running your VST plugins and Dante.

By using the free app CopperLan, you can easily network MIDI devices also (using the same cat6 cabling), for example make your usb MIDI master keyboard available on any other computer on the network to play VST instruments that are only installed on other computers and not on your main computer.

.

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

Using a Dante audio-over-IP network (also Dante Via), one can achieve a similar workflow as with ReaMote.

I don't suppose, you can do Off-line (high speed) rendering that way.
What about latency compensation ?

-Michael

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by mschnell

I don't suppose, you can do Off-line (high speed) rendering that way.
What about latency compensation ?

-Michael

obviously, offline rendering is not possible in this scenario.

Latency can be compensated by inserting "JS: Time adjustment" plugin (set to the appropriate value) into the master track of each computer that feeds signals back to the main machine. This latency usually is an individual constant value for every computer so once you have figured out the appropriate values, the system works in sample accurate sync.

.

[mustgroove]

The Dante idea is interesting, but another aspect of the use case I'm thinking of for ReaMote is the ability to run ReaMotes slaves in virtual machines on the same physical computer as the host.

In the current implementation, plugins have to exist (i.e. be installed) on both the slave and the host, and this does work in my experience where the ReaMote slave is running in a virtual machine - I've experimented a bit with this already with the slave running in Crossover Mac, and it's pretty solid from my limited attempts with it.

But my ideal scenario isn't currently possible because of this limitation. If ReaMote was implemented in a way where the host could run plugins that were installed only on the slave, and it was still solid when the slave is running in a virtual machine, that'd be pretty much my ultimate scenario.

[machinesworking]

Wouldn't like to see it removed. I own VEP Pro6 and it's great for sample libraries, I don't often need to use both the laptop and desktop for this, I don't do a ton of orchestral music. It makes much more sense to drive everything from the laptop in that scenario.

On the other hand I do use orchestral sample libraries a lot in my music, along with CPU pigs like Diva etc. So it would be nice to be able to use the laptop to host a few Divas etc. when I'm working on the desktop like I normally do.

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

obviously, offline rendering is not possible in this scenario.

Latency can be compensated by inserting "JS: Time adjustment" plugin (set to the appropriate value) into the master track of each computer that feeds signals back to the main machine.

So this is more or less a kind of "Outboard effect" workflow.

-Michael

[mschnell]

VEP costing more than 4 times as much as Reaper.

Dante is not free. I am not sure what of the different Dante products would be necessary to build up a decent system.

In any case I'd rather pay Cockos for a Reaper extension.

-Michael

[Reaktor:[Dave]]

The dante-approach wouldn't be beneficial for the discussed scenarios, as it is more complex to setup than Reamote/VEP and more expansive per audio-channel.

I prefer Reamote, not because it is cheaper than VEP. Reamote's workflow allows you to use all of Reaper's features when offloading plugins to another node. In contrast, using VEP you start dealing with a second mixer, you have an additional layer between your plugins parameters, you have to tweak your plugins on the remote node's screen and so on.
If Reamote would work better with Kontakt and could directly start plugins on a different node, I'd ditch VEP in a second. Please give some polish instead of abandoning.

[Crumbfort]

Just wanted to chime in here...

I've been using ReaMote in some recent projects to offload some of the more CPU hungry mixing/reverb plugins. It's been working quite well and I think I'll continue integrating it into my workflow. Frees up processing power to make more absurdly long FX chains on some instrument channels, hah!

I also use VE Pro for Kontakt/Play related stuff on a separate networked machine.

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by mschnell

VEP costing more than 4 times as much as Reaper.

Dante is not free. I am not sure what of the different Dante products would be necessary to build up a decent system.

In any case I'd rather pay Cockos for a Reaper extension.

-Michael

You need either

- one machine running Dante Via ($ 50) and the fx machine running Dante Virtual Soundcard ($ 30 alone or $ 60 for a combo package of both Dante Via + DVS)

- both machines running Dante Via

- one or more Dante hardware devices and Dante Virtual Soundcard on the fx machine (this is my current config). Usually, a free Dante Virtual Soundcard license is provided with a Dante hardware device.

Dante Via aggregates all audio devices of a computer (internal, USB, Firewire) and handles up to 48 channels (16 max. per application). Dante Virtual Soundcard cannot aggregate audio devices and can handle up to 64 inputs and outputs for the application to which it is assigned.

.

[AvianWaves]

I'm a bit late to the party, but wanted to chime in that ReaMote is useful to me as well. It definitely isn't perfect since I'm limited in what I can offload effectively, but with a little planning, it's a big help. Enhancing this feature would be really great.

[Win Conway]

Get rid of it, it hasn't worked relliably for what it would be useful for (kontakt etc) since forever.
If it was updated to actually work well then yeah it would be used a lot here, but as is, get rid, its useless.

[Dannii]

Originally Posted by Justin

There's also a bunch of ReaMote related code within REAPER, which doesn't see a lot of testing from what I can tell. So it's somewhat of a liability, as we go and improve other parts of REAPER, we have to worry about breaking it.

I've never used ReaMote at this stage but what are the areas of development that keeping it are causing a burden on? That might help some who use it decide whether they would rather keep using it or give it up to speed up other development.

[vitalker]

Agreed with ReaDave.

[Arionas]

Originally Posted by Justin

Just curious -- does anybody use ReaMote? If we removed it would you be sad? Do tell!

Justin please, don't remove ReaMote.
It's a huge cpu saver for my daily professional works in the studio.

[Steviebone]

I use external boxes as sound generators, have for many years. It became my brute force solution for lack of overall CPU power back in the day. Even though computers are quite powerful now days if you are using MIDI extensive sound generators offloading this work to external machines can be beneficial. Recently I experimented with several alternative approaches including reamote. I very quickly discarded reamote as a viable solution.

At the moment, I'm still using light pipe to get audio back into reaper in bulk. Unfortunately, due to ASIO limitations I can only use one device at a time limiting me to 32 channels.

The long-term answer is to use Dante enabled devices to connect the computers. While there are inexpensive Dante software solutions latency becomes an issue if you are trying to track with them so for Dante to work basically you're going to have to use hardware in that case. I have associates who are using Dante in their studio for quite large projects with hundreds of tracks of audio.

I'm not sure exactly how Reamote is transferring the audio over the network, but Dante is becoming a common standard for audio related hardware and it does not require all of the ridiculous prerequisites of having everything installed on both machines in the exact same locations, etc. To me this was complete idiocy. Not to mention unreliable. And there are licensing/ilok issues. Maybe someday reaper can include some sort of built-in Dante related support directly. To me that would be a better solution than REAmote.

There is one disadvantage to this approach and that is that the GUI for all of your sound generators is outside of reaper. I use Cantabile for this. Works great. Low overhead and stable. I then put all of my post-processing and affects on the channels returned to reaper. This simplifies everything as the external computers simply become sound generators and you can do everything else in the box.

On the upside, you can put all of your sound generators on a separate screen without taking up real estate in reaper.

[mschnell]

Another cry for "remote subprojects" that provide Midi and Audio stream transfer and synchronization between main PC and remote boxes (similar to ReaMote but with the VSTs installed only at the slaves and showing their GUI only there. hence a rather full featured Reaper (routing, JSRX, automation, local Midi and audio media) running remotely in a "live" configuration controlled by the main instance.

BTW.: with Dante, why Cantabile. I suppose you can use Reaper at the remote system just as well. (OK to be legal, you need a second Reaper license there for running Reaper on two PCs at the same time, but no additional learning curve.) In fact I initially bought Reaper to replace Cantabile or Forte by a more versatile solution.

-Michael

[davewah]

Hello Justin, Networked audio has been great for me in the Live world and I'd like it in my studio too. Dante is common Live and available from Focusrite for the studio. I like the look of Waves Soundgrid for the studio but that's not supported by Reaper. Do you think Reaper will support Soundgrid asp?

I run Reaper just now on an RME Hammerfall ASIO system, I've used Pro Tools, Cubase and Logic but I think I prefer Reaper, great program. So why Soundgrid and not REAmote. A very useful range of I/O boxes and format converters. Plus the appearance of Cards for Digital Mixers. I do a lot live sound work and Plugins are making more of an appearance in that world. And it gets a bit boring moving from USB, to Firewire, to Thunderbolt, to USB-C etc.....If it's all on an RJ45 life is better.

I'd really really like to stay on Reaper but moving to a Network audio system that has off the shelf hardware I/O available is probably going to become to tempting....

[TonE]

Originally Posted by RCJacH

so I stopped using ReaMote and started using copperlan/jack with ReaRoute, and started using Airwindows and JSFX only for all effect processing.

Which JSFX?

[Retronian]

I think having an integrated remote processing facility is a great feature, and it has already served me well in a 96 Khz project where I overestimated the cpu power of my computer. So please don't remove it!

[nativepulse]

I use it everyday. More advanced implementation would be quite nice.

[teeramusic]

I would use it if it actually worked. As far as I can tell, it doesn't work with waves and iZotope plugins (which I do use a lot and some of which are very CPU hungry). My vote is to keep it and make it better.

[isbuck]

Originally Posted by nativepulse

I use it everyday. More advanced implementation would be quite nice.

I'd be sorry to see Reamote go. I use it regularly and I also use Reastream. In some difficult live situations the two together can be a saver. If it is too much resource to continue to maintain it then maybe fork it off? Having what is effectively distributed processing on a product such as Reaper is brilliant. So, please Justin, keep it in!
Regards, Ian

[ChristopherT]

I have not used it yet, but for film, installation and large live performance scenarios, I would definitely make use of it often.

It is also nice to know that if a project requires, or grows, I can spread out the load on 2 computers.

I'm currently 3/4 through a 1000+ track installation, and ReaMote will be used heavily over the next 6 months.

It is a Reaper gem - and it would be a huge pity to go backwards and lose such a powerful feature.

[clepsydrae]

Used it when I had a wheezy laptop and it was great (in combination with wake-on-LAN) when I got to the mixing/mastering stage of large projects. Now I have a desktop and I haven't used it in years.

I feel sad to see it possibly leaving, but I have to admit that it's basically romantic nostalgia more than a reasonable concern. :-) It's a cool feature, but not one I see myself needing. It's interesting (and a bit surprising) to hear the power users talk about their continuing usage, though.

If there was some magic way to harness the horsepower of additional remote CPU's/GPU's without having to install things, maintain versions, etc, obviously that'd be great. Even that were even possible, I imagine that'd be sticky legal territory what with licensing and all.